The new Immigration Army

[Devastatin Dave]

When I was in I served with several non citizens. Kafir don't let the facts get in the way of your ignorant rant.

[Ice]

My great grandfather was recruited from a village near Naples, Italy to serve in the American Army during WWI. That's how he became a citizen and that's why I'm here today. There is nothing wrong or new about the idea. I really don't know the big hissy fit.

[Duke of Gloucester]

It is because immigrants are bad

As usual, the immigrant haters are asking the wrong question. The question should be "Why don't enough Americans want to sign up?" not "Should we ask foreigners to fight for us and give them citizenship?"

BTW Ice, why wasn't your grandfather fighting for the Italians?

In Britain, we have done the reverse, drafting people into the army and then refusing them a passport. A famous example is Spike Milligan who served in the artillery during WWII but was refused British citizenship because he was born in India and his father was Irish. So we have someone who served in the army, was wounded in action, whose father was only in India because he was serving in the British army, who is seen by many as the founder of modern British comedy not British enuogh to get a passport. Makes me proud to be British.

Wiki biography

[Redleg]

Well in the 1990's I served with soldiers that were from multiple nations that joined the United States Military to become citizens. So the changing of the law to make them citizens does not seem wrong to me at all - In fact it seems warranted given that the individuals that I served with were often outstanding soldiers and wanted to be successful, not only as soldiers but as citizens of their new home.

Why would one want to provided a rant about allowing those who wish to better themselves by becoming citizens of a new nation by serving that nation? Should we not want to allow those who are willing to serve, to become citizens?

The enlistment boothes have been in many countries for many years now - another fallacy of this rant, how else would a poor man from Africa be able to join the United States Army?

Then there is the historical evidence that shows something else, about the use of immigrants in the military. Remember the Civil War Kafir how many Irishmen were given citizenship for joining the Union Army?

A background source.

An American Melting Pot: Foreign Born Soldiers
Foreign-born Soldiers in the United States Regular Army Through the smoke of thousands of cannons, rifles, and small brush fires, Corp. Peter Petroff of the 14th United States Infantry could see his comrades moving ahead across an open field. Petroff, a recent immigrant from St. Petersburg, Russia, had been pressed into service by army recruiters almost as soon as he touched American soil. His commanders were so impressed with his soldierly dedication that they promoted him to corporal, despite the fact that he couldn't speak a word of English! Now, in May 1864, he found himself in the middle of a Civil War, moving toward the "Stonewall" Brigade of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia in an area known as "the Wilderness." Suddenly, Petroff was wounded in the left arm, losing consciousness. Later carried to safety, Petroff's arm was amputated. He survived the war to become a leading figure in the veteran's organization "The Grand Army of the Republic."

This was not an unusual situation. In fact, for most of the 19th century, the United States Regular Army was staffed by great numbers of foreign-born men. At times foreign-born soldiers made up over half of the Regular Army enlisted ranks. In an era in which recruitment difficulties and high numbers of desertions plagued the service, immigrants filled the empty ranks of the army and, in doing so, made significant contributions to the development and westward expansion of the nation. The mixture of soldiers from many nations, including men born in America, created a true "melting pot" where cooperation was necessary for survival. Immigrants who became soldiers had to live, work, eat, train, socialize, and sleep together in the small confines of many small frontier military posts.

Americans of the 19th century tended to dislike the idea of a standing regular army. George III's use of the British Army against the colonists in the American Revolution remained in the consciousness of most Americans, and resulted in continual recruitment problems for the professional U.S. Army. The army was also unattractive due to low pay, deplorable living conditions and locales, poor food, and harsh discipline. The pay of a 19th century infantry private ranged from $5 per month in the early century to a later high of $20 per month. Common laborers during this same period earned approximately one dollar a day. During the Civil War the private's pay was increased from $13 a month to $16, but in 1872 Congress failed to maintain emergency legislation and dropped the pay back to its pre-war levels. Fully one- third of the enlisted complement of the Regular Army deserted within the next twelve months. Out of this paltry salary the government garnished its share for retirement and a portion to be held until the soldier was discharged, in an attempt to prevent desertion.

During the period of westward expansion, most infantry, dragoon, and cavalry regiments were spread out along the borders of the frontier in sparsely populated areas, far from towns and cities. Artillery units rotated between frontier service and garrisoning eastern coastal forts. The duties of the frontier regulars included patrolling overland trails, protecting the mail, and protecting settlers and relocated American Indian people. Soldiers were often used as common laborers, building roads, bridges, and buildings, and spent very little time engaged in military activities. These mundane duties added to morale problems, as did the poor quality of the food. Inadequate supply services and the lack of fresh foods such as vegetables often limited the soldier's diet to beans, bread, and salt pork. Fresh meat was available only if there was adequate game in an area. These diet problems did not usually affect those Regular Army units stationed in Atlantic coastal forts, since they could be supplied by ship, but sickness due to being located near southern swamps was common.

http://www.nps.gov/jeff/melting_pot.html

[KafirChobee]

Well in the 1990's I served with soldiers that were from multiple nations that joined the United States Military to become citizens. So the changing of the law to make them citizens does not seem wrong to me at all - In fact it seems warranted given that the individuals that I served with were often outstanding soldiers and wanted to be successful, not only as soldiers but as citizens of their new home.

Why would one want to provided a rant about allowing those who wish to better themselves by becoming citizens of a new nation by serving that nation? Should we not want to allow those who are willing to serve, to become citizens? SURE, LETS SET UP BOOTHES IN CHINA - LIKE TODAY!

The enlistment boothes have been in many countries for many years now - another fallacy of this rant, how else would a poor man from Africa be able to join the United States Army?
PERSONALLY, NEVER MET A POOR MAN FRON AFRICA IN THE ARMY. HOW MANY DID YOU MEET?

Then there is the historical evidence that shows something else, about the use of immigrants in the military. Remember the Civil War Kafir how many Irishmen were given citizenship for joining the Union Army? OUR HOW THEY WERE GRABBED OF THE SHIPS AND FORCED INTO THE ARMY?
A background source.
http://www.nps.gov/jeff/melting_pot.html

As ever, a basic analogy can get taken out of context and twisted to mean something entirely different from its initial premise.

Melting pot? Give me a brake ... that ended with the immigration of the 1930's. Since then, those coming over have clung to their past rather than reaching for the future.

But, for those of you whom believe that it is a good idea to allow everyone instantanious citisonshit ... for being trained by our military doctrinition and propagandic selfserving military .... well by all means. Why not. After all, we get what we desrve.

That some dimwit attempts to subvert my message by calling ME prejudice is ludicrace .. obcene.

Look, I served with beucoupe dips from France, England, Canada, Belgian, Germany, Switzerland (and all sorts a South of the border guys I liked - 'cept for the Brits) .... that were dumb enough to be students during the Vietnam war. See, if they didn't meet the grade point average ... they got drafted. Believe it. Very few of them (except the Canadians) wanted our citizenship ('cept the Mex and such, and it wasn't available to them ... 'til Prez
Carter).

See, that's the clue. And our problem. See, as Americans we think all people want to be Americans. When in fact all they want is a fair chance. Which of course our Corporations will never allow. Were we to enforce that our corporations pay even our minimum wage where they have factories? Think about the numbers of capitalists created?

Still. Figure it out. Those claiming that any branch of the military is meeting its quotas? Get real, the numbers are what they are.

Christ, they even raised the enlistment age to 42 - 5 have so far enlisted (age 42,that is - heard from a friend 3 have been sent home; and the other two are under psych evaluation - j/k 'bout the latter).

It is not a matter of prejudice, so much as a matter of the citizens of a nation standing up for themselves - rather than finding away for them not to. By accepting anyone willing to spend X-years (or 'til they have the info desired and can desert back to Alquada, or what ever), a nation loses its identity. It loses its patriotism, except in the propandrance of BS laid out by those unwilling to serve or have their children serve.

I know, that you and yours are not counted amongst the malingers - Red. I know, that your family has served this nation almost as long as mine (if you can go beyond the French-Indian wars, you win). But, your attitiude that it is OK to seek out and bring in more Indians - of course by selection and upon approval of the selection committee? Well, I think it goes more deeply than filling the ranks, I think it may become a "In-sourcing . versus Out-sourcing".

Think past the propaganda, past the good for all, past the gee ain't we being fair by allowing all willing to fight the battles our kids ain't, past the concept that what was good for our nation yesterday is good for it today .... because it is expediant.

Regardless, think.

Just, please don't itemize. It just proves my point that you are enclosed in a bubble - the only way you can think your way out of it is by itemizing each disagreement by enclosing it in a bubble. Bubbleboy. J/K

[Redleg]

Well Kafir - I served with two individuals that came from different countries in Africa. Both were excellent soldiers. Recruiting booths have been in many of our embassies for decades, but then I guess the two soldiers from Africa that I served with were recruited under the current Bush Adminstration....LOL. (Try Clinton you will get closer.) Care to guess the number of soldiers I served with that were immigrants from other nations during my 10 years of active duty?

And the Irish question is easy - just do a little research and you will find out. Give you a hint both situations happened.

The rest of your rant is just that a rant. Immigrants have been filling the ranks of the United States Military since the day the military was founded. You might want to just sticking to calling me names because your coming off more prejudicial against immigrants then anything else.

I found your initial premise to be based on an anti-immigrant stance, and I see it continue with your follow-up rant. Show me where allowing immigrants immediate citizenship for service is a bad thing, that it goes against the prinicples of this country. Think past your baised views before attempting to correct my thinking. If you find that obsence then so be it - but your comments in this thread about immigrants serving in the military are bordering on the same ones I used to hear from whites concerning blacks.

Provide details in your arguement that demonstrates that this is being done solely to help with increasing the numbers of bodies in the military, because frankly your word is not good enough given the nature of your posts and the number of errors that have alreadly been pointed out concerning this topic alone. Provide details that show recruiting stations are being opened in countries, outside of those established prior to 2000. I see no reason whatsoever to see past your anti-immigrant prejudice to do any research on this topic - if it smells like an anti-immigrant rant and it reads like one, so its up to you to demonstrate that it is not.

My own ancestors were immigrants that served this nation just like your ancestors were immigrants that served, however it seems you have forgotten that in your search to demonize the Bush Adminstration and immigrants. Now if you want to demonize the Bush Adminstration find a sugject other then immigrants in the military, such as his failure to address the border, that would be an apporiate immigrantion issue. His failure to curb spending, his wanting a war with Iraq. So many other subjects to point out the errors of the Bush Adminstration and his failure as a president - but this particlur one your coming off as a prejudicial individual against immigrants.

2nd Edit: What the hell - I have decided to prove your attempt here is nothing other then an anti-immigrant rant, a rant so full of prejudice and bigotry that it disgusts me.

http://www.ailf.org/ipc/policy_repor...01_soldier.asp

On July 3, 2002, President Bush recognized the contributions of immigrants in the U.S. Armed Forces by signing an executive order that provided for “expedited naturalization” of non-citizen men and women serving on active-duty status since September 11, 2001. The order granted some 15,000 members of the U.S. military who served fewer than three years the right to apply for expedited citizenship in recognition of their service.1

Hmm the only google search that mentions immigrants being granted citizenship shows the July 2002 presidential order, and a measure passed in Congress in 2003 that supports the Presidential order. Which is indeed what you stated, however in your rant you failed to mention why it was done and that it was not an unique occurance, in fact I would call your initial attempt an attempting to paint a false picture of what happened. Care to guess how many past presidents have done the same thing as granting citizenship to immigrants in the military - I will give you a hint it has been done numerous times.

No search points out articles nor measures in congress about military recruitment being done activily overseas other then at the alreadly previousily establish locations as listed by the Military. The Standard ones of Puerto Rico, Germany, Japan, S. Korea, and Guam. So you will have to provide the links and evidence that you claim to be correct, because your initial post and your post #32 in this thread are nothing other then prejudical rants

I suggest you read the following PDF file Kafir it should enlighten you to the concept of immigrants and citizenship through service. I know its a PDF link so you will have to cut and past it into your address bar.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~cjwong/papers/JusMeritum.pdf#search='immigrants%20granted%20citizenship%20for%20service%20in%20the%20military'

or try this html link.

http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?...icp=1&.intl=us


The one that needs to look past the propaganda of the far left is yourself. You are doing yourself and the men and women who have served this nation a big disservice with this prejudicial rant against immigrants being given citizenship for service to the nation.

[Ice]

BTW Ice, why wasn't your grandfather fighting for the Italians?
[/URL]

I'm not really sure to be honest. I guess he never got drafted, but I don't know to be honest.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I've always loved this idea. The ability to apply for citizenship after a term of military service is a wonderful and age-old idea. Much better than the current system, if you think about it.

It worked for Rome until it later disolved the meaning of being Roman. The meaning of being culturally "American" seems to be quickly changing anyway, so why not capitalize by directing potential citizens to kill our enemies and bolster our interests globally.

better test than any paper one given in air conditioned rooms.

eventually, everyone will be American ayway

lets make it happen

[Marshal Murat]

What I'm worried about is that some are going to get good USA military training, desert, and hire out as mercenaries. Highly trained killers?

[Ice]

What I'm worried about is that some are going to get good USA military training, desert, and hire out as mercenaries. Highly trained killers?

Right. That seems really likely.

[Xiahou]

As usual, the immigrant haters are asking the wrong question.

If anything, this thread shows that those who are often accused of being "immigrant haters" are nothing of the sort. I have no problem with legal immigrants who come to our country via legal means. A legal immigrant who has volunteered to serve our country during wartime has certainly earned the right to be here.